The candidate site includes a number of oaks and other mature trees which is home to important wildlife including bats and owls. The site also contains important hedgerow supporting other wildlife in the area. This site is part of a property which has an agricultural covenant and therefore should not be built on for residential development purposes. Development here would take away a large amount of the little green space left in Dina Powys.

Building on this land will not only destroy a habitat that is abundant in wildlife that can never be restored, but it will also put pressure on many man made systems that through lack of foresight, poor planning and poor maintenance/management would be unable to cope with an increased number of houses, residents and cars. Firstly, the power supply. Even with updated transformers the supply to the area and Dinas powys as a whole regularly cuts out due to demand, more houses without significant investment on a wide scale would cause more outages. The sewage system and water supply that goes up and down pen y turnpike hill into the village was never built to service as many houses as it does now (evidenced by a major burst of a water pipe at the base of the hill last year), building more houses would require a complete overhaul of the entire sewage and water supply system. Pen y turnpike road itself is a country lane not meant for the amount of traffic it currently has. It is not maintained with uneven road surfaces, narrowings (that can’t be changed, nor would I want them to be), rarely salted in the winter months, pot holes that are poorly patched and so reopen constantly during wet and cold weather causing tyre blowouts on a regular basis, the bottom of the road that turns out right onto leckwith road is an unsafe hairpin turn onto a blind bend and the cause of many an accident every year… an increase of cars needing to use this road and the amount of heavy goods vehicles that would have to be driven along it to build any number of houses would be unsustainable and cause a huge number of problems, not withstanding the traffic jams that would be caused which would increase the pollution in the area. If I was to ignore the blatant lack of care and respect shown to the flora and fauna of the local environment (that should be allowed to thrive by itself and contributes to the health and wellbeing of the local population) by the planning of its destruction for profit, I would suggest that it would only be basic logic and sensible planning that all of the other factors must be proven to be adequately invested in, improved and/or resolved before any planning be approved, not approving planning with “assurances that these issues will be addressed”. I would also like evidence that there are no other brown field sites that would work just as well, albeit more complicated and at a slightly higher expense - I would trust that the building of houses on a green field site to the objection of almost everyone would not be approved simply for a matter of ease and profit.